From: "Poosa, Karthik" <karthik.poosa@intel.com>
To: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Cc: <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>, <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>,
<badal.nilawar@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 6/6] drm/xe/hwmon: Expose power sysfs entries based on firmware support
Date: Thu, 29 May 2025 20:27:34 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b2c4c872-8343-48ed-8a98-fd6ba89141fc@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aDhgL7NEDUj56oq3@intel.com>
On 29-05-2025 18:55, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 04:04:30PM +0530, Karthik Poosa wrote:
>> Enable hwmon sysfs entries (power_xxx) only when GPU firmware
>> supports it.
>> Previously, these entries were created if the MMIO register
>> was present. Now, we enable based on the data in the register.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Karthik Poosa <karthik.poosa@intel.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_hwmon.c | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>> 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_hwmon.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_hwmon.c
>> index c57c613471c3..25a89575a629 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_hwmon.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_hwmon.c
>> @@ -296,18 +296,12 @@ static void xe_hwmon_power_max_read(struct xe_hwmon *hwmon, u32 attr, int channe
>> if (hwmon->xe->info.has_mbx_power_limits) {
>> xe_hwmon_pcode_read_power_limit(hwmon, attr, channel, (u32 *)®_val);
>> } else {
>> - rapl_limit = xe_hwmon_get_reg(hwmon, REG_PKG_RAPL_LIMIT, channel);
>> - pkg_power_sku = xe_hwmon_get_reg(hwmon, REG_PKG_POWER_SKU, channel);
>> -
>> /*
>> - * Valid check of REG_PKG_RAPL_LIMIT is already done in xe_hwmon_power_is_visible.
>> + * Valid check of these registers is already done in xe_hwmon_power_is_visible.
>> * So not checking it again here.
>> */
>> - if (!xe_reg_is_valid(pkg_power_sku)) {
>> - drm_warn(&xe->drm, "pkg_power_sku invalid\n");
>> - *value = 0;
>> - goto unlock;
>> - }
>> + rapl_limit = xe_hwmon_get_reg(hwmon, REG_PKG_RAPL_LIMIT, channel);
>> + pkg_power_sku = xe_hwmon_get_reg(hwmon, REG_PKG_POWER_SKU, channel);
>> reg_val = xe_mmio_read32(mmio, rapl_limit);
>> }
>>
>> @@ -652,17 +646,20 @@ static umode_t xe_hwmon_attributes_visible(struct kobject *kobj,
>> int ret = 0;
>> int channel = (index % 2) ? CHANNEL_PKG : CHANNEL_CARD;
>> u32 power_attr = (index > 1) ? PL2_HWMON_ATTR : PL1_HWMON_ATTR;
>> - u32 uval;
>> + u32 uval = 0;
>> + struct xe_reg rapl_limit;
>> + struct xe_mmio *mmio = xe_root_tile_mmio(hwmon->xe);
>>
>> xe_pm_runtime_get(hwmon->xe);
>>
>> if (hwmon->xe->info.has_mbx_power_limits) {
>> xe_hwmon_pcode_read_power_limit(hwmon, power_attr, channel, &uval);
>> - ret = (uval & PWR_LIM_EN) ? attr->mode : 0;
>> } else if (power_attr != PL2_HWMON_ATTR) {
>> - ret = xe_reg_is_valid(xe_hwmon_get_reg(hwmon, REG_PKG_RAPL_LIMIT,
>> - channel)) ? attr->mode : 0;
>> + rapl_limit = xe_hwmon_get_reg(hwmon, REG_PKG_RAPL_LIMIT, channel);
>> + if (xe_reg_is_valid(rapl_limit))
>> + uval = xe_mmio_read32(mmio, rapl_limit);
>> }
>> + ret = (uval & PWR_LIM_EN) ? attr->mode : 0;
>>
>> xe_pm_runtime_put(hwmon->xe);
>>
>> @@ -806,24 +803,20 @@ static umode_t
>> xe_hwmon_power_is_visible(struct xe_hwmon *hwmon, u32 attr, int channel)
>> {
>> u32 uval = 0;
>> - struct xe_reg rapl_limit;
>> + struct xe_reg reg;
>> struct xe_mmio *mmio = xe_root_tile_mmio(hwmon->xe);
>>
>> switch (attr) {
>> case hwmon_power_max:
>> case hwmon_power_cap:
>> - case hwmon_power_label:
>> if (hwmon->xe->info.has_mbx_power_limits) {
>> xe_hwmon_pcode_read_power_limit(hwmon, attr, channel, &uval);
>> } else if (attr != PL2_HWMON_ATTR) {
>> - rapl_limit = xe_hwmon_get_reg(hwmon, REG_PKG_RAPL_LIMIT, channel);
>> - if (xe_reg_is_valid(rapl_limit))
>> - uval = xe_mmio_read32(mmio, rapl_limit);
>> + reg = xe_hwmon_get_reg(hwmon, REG_PKG_RAPL_LIMIT, channel);
>> + if (xe_reg_is_valid(reg))
>> + uval = xe_mmio_read32(mmio, reg);
>> }
>> if (uval & PWR_LIM_EN) {
>> - if (attr == hwmon_power_label)
>> - return 0444;
>> -
>> drm_info(&hwmon->xe->drm, "%s is supported on channel %d\n",
>> PWR_ATTR_TO_STR(attr), channel);
>> return 0664;
>> @@ -832,17 +825,39 @@ xe_hwmon_power_is_visible(struct xe_hwmon *hwmon, u32 attr, int channel)
>> PWR_ATTR_TO_STR(attr), channel);
>> return 0;
>> case hwmon_power_rated_max:
>> - if (hwmon->xe->info.has_mbx_power_limits)
>> + if (hwmon->xe->info.has_mbx_power_limits) {
>> return 0;
>> - else
>> - return xe_reg_is_valid(xe_hwmon_get_reg(hwmon, REG_PKG_POWER_SKU,
>> - channel)) ? 0444 : 0;
>> + } else {
>> + reg = xe_hwmon_get_reg(hwmon, REG_PKG_POWER_SKU, channel);
>> + if (xe_reg_is_valid(reg))
>> + uval = xe_mmio_read32(mmio, reg);
>> + return uval ? 0444 : 0;
> with these checks here, now your drm_info will never be visible... and the ifs there
> becomes bogus...
if check i.e PWR_LIM_EN check is 'needed' in xe_hwmon_power_max_read, as
power limit can be disabled by a write !
the drm_info there can provide dmesg log, that power limit was disabled
as shown below
root@:/sys/class/hwmon/hwmon5# echo 0 > power1_cap
root@:/sys/class/hwmon/hwmon5# dmesg | grep -i dis
[19645.834054] xe 0000:03:00.0: [drm:xe_hwmon_write [xe]] disabling PL2
on channel 0
root@:/sys/class/hwmon/hwmon5# cat power1_cap
0
root@:/sys/class/hwmon/hwmon5# dmesg | grep -i dis
[19703.412812] xe 0000:03:00.0: [drm] PL2 disabled for channel 0, val
0x0000000000000000
if we dont want the PLx disabled log in read, we could remove that.
> Move the entire logic here and make like there, checking enabling bit and not
> all the 32 bits...
REG_PKG_POWER_SKU defintion is different from REG_PKG_RAPL_LIMIT, it does not have enable bits. We have to check all bits of it.
>
>> + }
>> case hwmon_power_crit:
>> if (channel == CHANNEL_CARD) {
>> xe_hwmon_pcode_read_i1(hwmon, &uval);
>> return (uval & POWER_SETUP_I1_WATTS) ? 0644 : 0;
>> }
>> break;
>> + case hwmon_power_label:
>> + if (hwmon->xe->info.has_mbx_power_limits) {
>> + xe_hwmon_pcode_read_power_limit(hwmon, attr, channel, &uval);
>> + } else {
>> + reg = xe_hwmon_get_reg(hwmon, REG_PKG_POWER_SKU, channel);
>> + if (xe_reg_is_valid(reg))
>> + uval = xe_mmio_read32(mmio, reg);
>> +
>> + if (!uval) {
>> + reg = xe_hwmon_get_reg(hwmon, REG_PKG_RAPL_LIMIT, channel);
>> + if (xe_reg_is_valid(reg))
>> + uval = xe_mmio_read32(mmio, reg);
>> + }
>> + }
>> + if ((!(uval & PWR_LIM_EN)) && channel == CHANNEL_CARD) {
>> + xe_hwmon_pcode_read_i1(hwmon, &uval);
>> + return (uval & POWER_SETUP_I1_WATTS) ? 0444 : 0;
>> + }
>> + return (uval) ? 0444 : 0;
>> default:
>> return 0;
>> }
>> --
>> 2.25.1
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-29 14:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-29 10:34 [PATCH v11 0/6] drm/xe/hwmon: Add mailbox power limits, PL2, read energy from PMT Karthik Poosa
2025-05-29 10:34 ` [PATCH v11 1/6] drm/xe/hwmon: Add support to manage power limits though mailbox Karthik Poosa
2025-05-29 10:34 ` [PATCH v11 2/6] drm/xe/hwmon: Move card reactive critical power under channel card Karthik Poosa
2025-05-29 10:34 ` [PATCH v11 3/6] drm/xe/hwmon: Add support to manage PL2 though mailbox Karthik Poosa
2025-05-29 10:34 ` [PATCH v11 4/6] drm/xe/hwmon: Expose powerX_cap_interval Karthik Poosa
2025-05-29 10:34 ` [PATCH v11 5/6] drm/xe/hwmon: Read energy status from PMT Karthik Poosa
2025-05-29 10:34 ` [PATCH v11 6/6] drm/xe/hwmon: Expose power sysfs entries based on firmware support Karthik Poosa
2025-05-29 13:25 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2025-05-29 14:57 ` Poosa, Karthik [this message]
2025-05-29 15:03 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2025-05-29 10:40 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for drm/xe/hwmon: Add mailbox power limits, PL2, read energy from PMT Patchwork
2025-05-29 10:40 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2025-05-29 10:42 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2025-05-29 10:55 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2025-05-29 10:58 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2025-05-29 10:59 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2025-05-29 18:21 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: failure " Patchwork
2025-05-30 5:31 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for drm/xe/hwmon: Add mailbox power limits, PL2, read energy from PMT (rev2) Patchwork
2025-05-30 5:31 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2025-05-30 5:32 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2025-05-30 5:43 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2025-05-30 5:45 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2025-05-30 5:47 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2025-05-30 6:09 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2025-05-31 0:23 ` ✓ Xe.CI.Full: " Patchwork
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=b2c4c872-8343-48ed-8a98-fd6ba89141fc@intel.com \
--to=karthik.poosa@intel.com \
--cc=anshuman.gupta@intel.com \
--cc=badal.nilawar@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox